New York State Reforms Harsh Rockefeller Laws

Civil Rights Groups, Community Organizers,
Political Leaders Join To 'Drop The Rock'

As the New York Times reported on March 25, 2009 ("New York Lawmakers Agree to Repeal '70s-Era Drug Laws"), "Gov. David A. Paterson and New York legislative leaders have reached an agreement to dismantle much of what remains of the state's strict 1970s-era drug laws, once among the toughest in the nation." The Times further explains that "The deal would repeal many of the mandatory minimum prison sentences now in place for lower-level drug felons, giving judges the authority to send first-time nonviolent offenders to treatment instead of prison. The plan would also expand drug treatment programs and widen the reach of drug courts at a cost of at least $50 million."

Those legislators made good on their March promise when, as advocacy group Drop the Rock stated on its website, "the NY State Senate voted to reform the Rockefeller Drug Laws" in early April of 2009. Aside from the reforms mentioned by the Times, Drop the Rock also reports that "In some limited cases, people who are currently incarcerated under the Rockefeller Drug Laws will be able to apply for resentencing and release." However, as they remind readers, "this is not the end of the Rockefeller Drug Laws, [but] if we have anything to do with it, it will be the beginning of the end."

Research shows that in the last decade the city of New York has experienced a massive increase in the number of minor marijuana possession arrests. New York Newsday columnist Sheryl McCarthy wrote on July 16, 2007
("Arrests For Pot Are Excessive") that
"'I call it an epidemic of marijuana arrests. New York City has been on a binge of marijuana arrests for the last 10 years.'
'I would call it a dragnet.'
These are the conclusions of Harry Levine, a professor of sociology at Queens College, and Deborah Small, director of
Break the Chains, a nonprofit drug policy reform group and a longtime advocate of changing the city's drug policies.
The two, who are studying the city's marijuana arrest policy, want to see the police give summonses to people who are caught smoking marijuana in public or with small amounts of marijuana on them, instead of the current practice of arresting them and jailing them overnight.
According to arrest data from the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, the number of arrests for marijuana possession skyrocketed from about 10,000 in 1996 to more than 50,000 in 2000. The arrests have tapered off somewhat since then, but remain high: 33,000 arrests for marijuana possession last year.
Meanwhile, federal government figures show that between 1997 and 2006 marijuana use among high school students and 19- to 28-year-olds rose only slightly."

According to McCarthy,
"Studies of marijuana arrests in New York City by Levine, researchers at the University of Chicago Law School, and the National Development and Research Institutes found that the overwhelming number of those arrested for marijuana possession were black and Latino males, even though national studies show that black and Latino high school students use marijuana at a lower rate than white students. However, the state criminal justice services officials say they have concerns about the reliability of the city's statistics on the race of those arrested because of how racial data are reported.
Marijuana arrests in the city surged in the late 1990s as part of Mayor Rudolph Giuliani's quality-of-life policing strategy, and have continued under Mayor Michael Bloomberg. But although early law enforcement efforts concentrated on heavily trafficked public areas like Central Park and midtown Manhattan, the efforts shifted to lower-income black and Latino communities, the studies say."

The columnist noted that
"Legal Aid attorneys I talked to confirmed that they're handling far more marijuana possession cases than in years past. One experienced Legal Aid attorney told me the police used to issue desk appearance tickets, but now they're putting them through the arrest wringer. 'It's disturbing,' says Seymour James, the attorney in charge of crime practice for the Legal Aid Society,
'incarcerating them overnight when they could be given a summons. There is no reason for this ... for merely having a marijuana cigarette.'
The police have considerable discretion in how they treat marijuana offenses. They can confiscate the pot, give the person a warning and tell them to go home. They can write a summons, which is similar to a traffic ticket and requires the offender to appear before a judge on a certain date. A summons can result in a fine or a dismissal. Or they can choose to arrest and handcuff the offenders, put them in a police car, take them to the station house, fingerprint and photograph them, and hold them in jail until they can be arraigned, which can sometimes take days. Many possession charges are dismissed if the person doesn't get into any more trouble in the next year. But it's ridiculously punitive to put people through a humiliating process for a minor offense.
'We're socializing black and Latino youths to the criminal justice
system,' Levine says. 'We're teaching them how to be in the
system.' It's like telling them this is a rehearsal for a future of getting arrested and spending time in jail, Small says."

In Dec. 2005, the
Legal Aid Society of New York released a devastating
analysis of recent reforms to New York's infamous Rockefeller drug laws. The New York Times reported on Dec. 15, 2005
(
"Few State Prisoners Freed Under Eased Drug Law") that
"When Gov. George E. Pataki signed a law a year ago reducing what he called "unduly long sentences" for drug crimes, he predicted that hundreds of nonviolent drug offenders would be released from prison.
But so far, only 142 prisoners - about 30 percent of those originally eligible for new sentences under the revised law - have been freed, according to a report released yesterday by the Legal Aid Society."

According to the Times,
"The new sentencing provisions were the most widely heralded aspect of the Drug Law Reform Act of 2004, which changed the mandatory sentencing laws imposed in 1973 when Nelson Rockefeller was governor.
Those laws had been criticized for requiring judges to impose a sentence of 15 years to life on anyone convicted of selling two ounces or possessing four ounces of narcotics, whether they were drug lords or low-level couriers.
The new law increased the amount of drugs that trigger long sentences, and reduced those sentences to 8 to 20 years. And it allowed prisoners serving the longest prison terms to ask to be resentenced under the new standards."

The Times noted that
"A major reason that relatively few prisoners have been released is that district attorneys are still opposing resentencing requests and, in some cases, asking judges to impose long prison terms, said William Gibney, a senior attorney for Legal Aid who wrote the report."

A copy of the report,
"One Year Later: New York's
Experience With Drug Law Reform," can be downloaded from the
CSDP website.

New York took one more small step toward reform of its draconian Rockefeller
drug laws in August 2005. The New York Times reported on Aug. 31, 2005 (
"Pataki Signs Bill Softening Drug Laws") that
"Gov. George E. Pataki signed a bill into law last night that will
soften the so-called Rockefeller drug laws, his office said.
The new law will allow about 540 inmates - those convicted of Class
A-2 felonies - the chance to petition for resentencing and early
release."

According to the Times,
"The bill, one in a batch of about 100 that the governor signed
about 7:30 p.m., would have gone into effect at midnight without Mr.
Pataki's signature unless he had vetoed it. The governor, who
is weighing a run for president, signed the bill 'based on its
merits,' a spokesman, Kevin Quinn, said."

The Times noted
"While reformers hailed the new law last night, they said
they would like to see more done to dismantle the drug laws.
'We took 2 steps forward on Rockefeller reform last December,
and we're taking another step forward today, but we have another
good 10 steps to go,' said Ethan Nadelmann, the executive
director of the
Drug Policy Alliance, a nonprofit group
focused on changing national drug policy."

At last, New York has begun to change its draconian drug laws, taking
at least a beginning babystep toward reform.
The New York Times reported (
"New York State Votes To Reduce Drug Sentences")
"After years of false starts, state lawmakers voted Tuesday
evening to reduce the steep mandatory prison sentences given to
people convicted of drug crimes in New York State, sanctions
considered among the most severe in the nation. The push to
soften the so-called Rockefeller drug laws came after a nearly
decade-long campaign to ease the drug penalties instituted in
the 1970s that put some low-level first-time drug offenders
behind bars for sentences ranging from 15 years to life. Under
the changes passed Tuesday, which Gov. George E. Pataki said
he would sign, the sentence for those same offenders would be
reduced to 8 to 20 years in prison. The law will allow more
than 400 inmates serving lengthy prison terms on those top
counts to apply to judges to get out of jail early."

According to the Times,
"While some elected officials and drug policy advocates hailed
the drug sentencing changes as a major step forward, others
complained that they did not go far enough. They complained
that inmates serving what they called unduly long prison terms
for lesser crimes would not be allowed to apply for early
release, and that judges were not given the power to sentence
some offenders to treatment programs rather than prison. 'This
is it?' an exasperated State Senator Thomas Duane,
a Manhattan Democrat, shouted during the debate. 'This is
it? After all this time, this is what comes to the floor?
It would be an unbelievable stretch to call this Rockefeller drug
reform.' But Russell Simmons, the hip-hop mogul who had
vigorously pushed for the changes, said he was 'very, very
happy,' and credited pressure from the hip-hop community
for raising awareness on the issue. Assembly Speaker Sheldon
Silver credited a changed political landscape - including the
election of a new district attorney in Albany County, David
Soares, who ran with the backing of the Working Families Party
on a platform seeking drug-law changes - for bringing the
state's leaders to a compromise. He said he would continue
to push for more changes next year. 'It isn't
everything we wanted, and I think we will continue to press
for some of those things, but I think the climate has changed
here,' he said."

New York Newsday published on Dec. 7, 2004, a summary of the changes made
to New York's drug law by passage of Senate Bill 7802/Assembly
Bill 11895 (
"Highlights Of Drug Law Sentencing Agreement").
According to Newsday:
"Eliminates the maximum life sentences for the harshest of the
penalties. For the previous 15-to-25-years-to-life sentence given
to first offenders without prior criminal histories, a punishment of
8 years to 20 years would be substituted, making the offender
eligible for release from prison in about 6.8 years. Currently,
that offender would have to serve at least the minimum term of
15 years.
"Offenders who now get lesser sentences under the statute,
for instance, three years to life under the old system, would
have a sentence of between three and 10 years. Offenders would
be eligible for release in 2.6 years.
"Moderate reductions would be made in other mandatory drug
sentences. An offender who currently faces a 4-1/2-to-9-year
sentence, for instance, would face a determinate sentence of
3-1/2 years. That would make them eligible for release in
about three years.
"The approximately 400 inmates serving time under the
most severe punishments in the current statute, with sentences
of 15-to-25-years-to-life, can petition their sentencing court
for resentencing under the new guidelines.
"All other nonviolent incarcerated drug offenders could
apply for additional "merit" time of one-sixth off their minimum
sentences by such positive behavior behind bars as earning a
high school equivalency degree, completing drug treatment or
achieving a vocational trade certificate.
"Allows nonviolent drug offenders to enter the Comprehensive
Alcohol and Substance Abuse Treatment Program six months earlier
than current law allows, from two years of initial parole
eligibility to 18 months of initial parole eligibility.
"Threshold weights for defendants involved in the most
serious offenses would be doubled. For instance, defendants
would have to be caught possessing eight ounces of cocaine
or heroin to qualify for the most serious punishment, instead
of the current four ounces."

The New York legislature ended its session in June 2004 without accomplishing
any of the reforms it set out to do at the beginning. The Troy Record
reported on June 22, 2004 (
"Senate, Assembly On Form To The End") that
" Today, the session officially ends without a budget in place
for the 20th straight year, and issues long outstanding remain
unresolved. Legislators will head home and negotiations will continue
behind closed doors. Bruno said it is a waste of time and taxpayer
dollars to keep his chamber in Albany while so little substantive
work is taking place. He is prepared, he said, to call lawmakers
back if something of significance is agreed upon. 'We agreed
in December to close down on June 22,' Bruno said. 'We
will continue to talk and continue to negotiate. ... What we
are not going to do is sit around here.' The three leaders
do hold out hope of agreeing on a "handful," of items - down from
more than two dozen last week - but relations were still tense
Monday, particularly between the governor and the speaker."

According to the Record,
"Outside of a two-house bill requiring hunters to wear
fluorescent orange gear while hunting, it was much of the same on
Monday, the second to last day of the legislative session. Gov.
George Pataki, state Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno and
Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver emerged from a nearly three-hour
meeting without agreeing on anything. The governor proposed a
six-week budget extender to keep the state in business until Aug.
2. It is much longer than the one- and two-week extenders that
have been passed since April 1, the start of the state's
fiscal year. After some debate on the floor, the Senate
approved the bill. But after threatening not to pass it and
to essentially shut down the government Monday afternoon, Silver
and the Assembly Democrats passed a resolution asking for only
a one-week extender."

The Record noted that specifically
"A host of other non-budget-related items are being held
hostage by the lack of a budget, such as reform of the harsh
Rockefeller-era drug laws, new regulations to site power plants,
insurance parity for mental health patients, known as Timothy's
Law, and how to implement the Help America Vote Act."

The New York state legislature and NY Governor George Pataki
began their annual dance around reform of the Rockefeller
Drug Laws in early June 2004. The Associated Press reported on
June 4, 2004 (
"NY May Reform Rockefeller Drug Laws") that
"This week, members of a legislative conference
committee verbally agreed to reduce the 15 years-to-life
mandatory sentences for the most serious offenses to as
little as 3 to 10 years. Gov. George Pataki and most
legislators have called it an injustice that a first-time
offender could face a life sentence for possessing as
little as 4 ounces of a controlled substance or for
selling only 2 ounces. 'We have never gotten this
close to an agreement,' said state Sen. Dale Volker,
the committee's Republican co-chairman. 'Now we are
right down to the nitty gritty.'"

According to AP,
"The sticking points between the Republican-controlled
Senate and the Democrat-controlled Assembly both address the
issue of treatment for nonviolent offenders. The Assembly
wants those offenders to get treatment, in many cases
with no prison time, and wants to remove the veto power
that district attorneys now have over courts' decisions
to send offenders to treatment. The Senate opposes both
steps. Letting offenders avoid prison entirely under
drug law reform would represent a 'dramatic change
in our entire sentencing scheme,' Volker said.
'You're absolutely correct,' said the committee's
other co-chairman, Democratic Assemblyman Jeffrion Aubry,
arguing that such sweeping change is needed.
Republican senators also say prosecutors need the
threat of longer prison sentences to give offenders
incentive to successfully complete treatment. New
York spends more than $500 million a year to incarcerate
nonviolent drug offenders, many of whom can rebuild
their lives faster if they receive treatment, said Michael
Blain of the Drug Policy Alliance, an organization that
espouses reducing both drug misuse and drug prohibition,
and promoting the sovereignty of individuals. "

The article notes that
"Twenty-seven states have rolled back mandatory
minimum sentences for drug offenses, liberalized drug
treatment options or otherwise eased drug statutes in
the last year, Blain said. Former Gov. Nelson
Rockefeller pushed the statutes through the New York
Legislature in 1973 and 1974, at a time when he felt
the state's inner cities were being lost to heroin
addiction and judges were balking at imposing stiff
sentences on drug offenders. About 2,000 inmates are
serving up to life in New York prisons under the
Rockefeller drug laws. More than 13,600 others are
serving shorter mandatory sentences for less-severe
drug violations. "

The 2003 political debates over reform of New York's
harsh, oppressive Rockefeller drug laws began in earnest in
mid-July, with the introduction of Governor Pataki's
legislative reform package. The New York Times
reported on July 16, 2003 (
"Governor Offers Legislation To Soften Harsh Drug
Laws") that
"Gov. George E. Pataki today released the details of
his latest plan to soften New York's mandatory sentences
for drug crimes, putting forward a bill he urged the State
Legislature to pass. 'I think it's a very
sound compromise, and I think it represents, really, a
historic opportunity to reform these laws,' Mr. Pataki
said. But any chance of consensus seemed to evaporate quickly,
as the speaker of the State Assembly, Sheldon Silver, a
Democrat, laced into Mr. Pataki's proposal, saying it fell
far short of reforming the Rockefeller-era drug laws, which all
sides in Albany agree are too harsh."

According to the Times,
"By the end of the day, one thing was clear: A debate that
has dragged on for years in Albany was still not resolved
despite another round of heated rhetoric, an earnest
last-minute scramble at the session's close in June to find
middle ground and another push by the governor to reach an
agreement to change the laws. The perennial effort could be
called Exhibit A for Albany's dysfunction, many outside the
state capital say. 'This is a great public relations move,
but it is bad public policy,' Andrew Cuomo, an advocate
of changing the laws, said today of the governor's
proposal. 'Now, we don't know what the bill
actually means.' In many ways the reactions of Mr.
Bruno and Mr. Silver answer the question of whether the
governor's proposal has a chance. The two men must agree
to pass legislation, in exactly the same form, for it to get to
the governor for signing. It is a feat not often achieved. In
this case, aides to Mr. Silver attacked everything about
the governor's latest proposal, including the form in which
it was written, its content and, more important, what was left
out. They questioned the governor's commitment to the
issue, saying Mr. Pataki's proposal could not be declared
dead on arrival because it had not officially arrived: it
was slipped under the door of an Assembly lawyer on Monday night
while lawmakers were out of session and out of town. 'We
are most disappointed by the complete lack of judicial discretion
and the absence of any drug treatment diversion provision or
funding for low-level offenders under this proposal,' Mr.
Silver said in a joint statement with Jeffrion L. Aubry,
a Democratic assemblyman from Queens who has made changing the
laws a focus of his political career."

Reactions from others involved in reform efforts were mixed. The
Albany Times-Union reported (
"Critics Pan Pataki Drug Law Proposal") that
"Pataki aides said the plan, which would cut prison
sentences for many drug offenders but increase penalties for
those who use
children or the Internet to ply their wares, reflected a
conceptual compromise reached last month in marathon
closed-door negotiations with legislative leaders and hip-hop
music mogul Russell Simmons. Simmons endorsed the governor's
plan Tuesday, as did Democratic presidential hopeful the Rev.
Al Sharpton. But other drug law reform advocates who had attended
the unusual meeting with Simmons and state leaders on June 18
insisted Pataki's proposal did not conform to the
agreement reached that night. 'From my perspective, what
they did was take a tentative agreement and add a lot of frills
to it that eviscerates any of the good stuff that was in
it,' said Deborah Small, director of public policy at the
Drug Policy Alliance, who joined Simmons in trying to hash out
the drug law overhaul. 'If this passes, it will do more
harm than good.'"

The international human rights organization
Human Rights Watch issued a report on impact of the Rockefeller
drug laws on June 18, 2002. The report,
Collateral Casualties: Children of Incarcerated Drug
Offenders in New York, presents a statistical analysis
of the hidden costs of New York's harsh Rockefeller laws.
Among the findings:
"An estimated 23,537 children currently have parents
in New York prisons convicted of drug charges.
"An estimated 11,113 currently incarcerated New York drug
offenders are parents of children.
"Since 1980, an estimated 124,496 children have had at
least one parent imprisoned in New York on drug charges.
"Some 50 percent of mothers and fathers in New York
prisons for drug convictions do not receive visits from their
children."

In a
news release dated June 18, 2002,
Jamie Fellner, director of Human Rights Watch's U.S.
Program, said "Disproportionately harsh drug sentences
have not only led to the unnecessary incarceration of tens of
thousands of low-level drug offenders, but also deprived
thousands of children of their parents." Fellner
continued:
"Safeguarding communities and protecting families from
drug trafficking and drug abuse are important public interests.
But the means chosen to combat drugs should neither violate
human rights nor inflict unnecessary collateral harm."

New York Governor George Pataki (R) released his newest
proposal for reforming the state's drug laws in early June,
2002. The proposal was quickly dismissed by groups pushing
for reform of New York's draconian Rockefeller laws. The
Troy Record reported on June 8, 2002 (
"Pataki, Assembly Propose Rockefeller Drug Law
Changes&quot) that
"Gov. George Pataki released a new proposal Friday to
change mandatory sentencing laws for drug possession dating back
to the days of former Gov. Nelson Rockefeller. While Pataki
portrayed the plan as a compromise designed to meet legislative
objections to his earlier proposals, the initiative was
immediately panned by critics who said the Republican governor
is still not going far enough to ease the drug laws.
'Yet another press release from the governor,' said
John Dunne, a former Republican state senator who voted for the
original 'Rockefeller drug laws' but who now favors
reform."

The Record noted that
"The unveiling of a bill by Pataki follows Wednesday's
release of the Democratic state Assembly's bargaining
position on easing the drug laws. The Assembly said its bill
would continue to give judges more sentencing discretion than
the governor favors, and prosecutors less power to block the
diversion of defendants into drug treatment than the governor
would allow." The Record said that according to
Chauncey Parker, Pataki's
criminal justice services coordinator, the governor's plan
"would allow more people into drug treatment by expanding
the categories of drug offenders eligible for such referrals.
The governor said, however, defendants must not have violence in
their criminal records to be eligible for treatment. The
governor said he'd also give more discretion to judges
when sentencing nonviolent drug felons and reduce sentence length
in some cases. For Class A-1 drug felons who are now subject to
a minimum of 15 years to life in prison for a conviction,
Pataki said his proposal would reduce their sentences to as
little as 7 years and 2 months in prison. Pataki's plan
would also increase sentences for violent and major drug
traffickers. People who arm themselves while selling marijuana
or narcotics would be subject to a five-year mandatory sentence,
whether they use the firearm or not, and be considered a violent
felon ineligible for diversion to a drug treatment program,
Parker said."

Critics of the Rockefeller laws complain that neither proposal
is adequate. According to the Record,
"Robert Gangi, head of the Correctional Association prison
watchdog group, said both the Assembly plan and the Pataki plan
have flaws. 'Our fundamental critique of both plans is
they both include broad exceptions in terms of the drug offenders
who would be eligible to diversion,' Gangi said."

New York's Drop The Rock coalition will hold a march and
concert/rally on June 15, 2002 in NYC.
The "Drop the Rock March"
will start at 12:30pm. Marchers will meet on 126th
Street between Adam Clayton Powell & Frederick Douglas
Blvd. From there, people will march to the
concert/rally (which starts at 2:30)
at Marcus Garvey Park at 122nd and Madison Ave.
Details about
the event are also available
from the group's website.
Event flyers
are available from the group
by clicking here.

Protesters took their message to the streets on May 8, 2002,
to mark the beginning of the 30th and hopefully last year of the
Rockefeller Drug Laws. As columnist Sheryl McCarthy
wrote in New York
Newsday on May 9, 2002 (
"It's Time For Tough Questions About Drug
Law"),
"They were out on Manhattan's Third Avenue yesterday:
the retired judge, the pardoned former prison inmate, the prison
reformers, the drug-policy people, the treatment-program people,
the recovering addicts, a handful of lawyers and, as always, the
relatives of those in prison. People like Evelyn Sanchez, 62,
whose son has spent a decade in Attica and is still counting, and
Minerva Dones, 76, whose grandson has spent seven years in the
Greenhaven State prison facility in upstate New York. It was the
first day of the 30th year since the enactment of the so-called
Rockefeller drug laws, and the people taking part in this rally
were doing what they've done for years: demanding the
repeal of laws that have filled more state prisons than any other
laws that have ever been passed."

The harsh sentences required under the Rockefeller Laws have
generated a great deal of opposition ever since their inception.
As columnist Ellis Henican wrote in Newsday on May 8, 2002 (
"Sadly, Drug Laws Stay"), then-Governor Nelson
"Rockefeller had been opposed on this not just by the usual
civil libertarians and liberal groups. Many conservatives warned
his rigid plan would only make things worse."

Henican continues: "He'd fought 'against
this strange alliance of established interests, political
opportunists and misguided soft-liners who joined forces and
tried unsuccessfully to stop this program,' he complained
at the signing ceremony.
"Strange alliance?
"'Well, the Judicial Conference opposed it, the
district attorney's association opposed it, there were police
officials up here opposing it,' he told reporters afterward.
"Now there's a renowned trio of softies for you -
judges, DAs and cops!
"Apparently it didn't occur to the governor that maybe
the whole law-enforcement world hadn't gone suddenly
weak-kneed. Maybe these judges, DAs and cops had something over
the billionaire governor. They'd actually dealt with the
issue of drugs in real life.
"And what exactly has all this harshness bought on the New
York drug front, beside packing New York's prisons with
nonviolent drug offenders, many convicted of selling or possessing
relatively minor amounts?
"Almost nothing good. After 29 years, drugs are cheaper,
more potent and more plentiful than they've ever been.
"And the prisons are far more crowded. In 2000, more than
44 percent of the people sent to state prison in New York were
locked up for drug crimes. That's compared to 11 percent in
1980. The vast majority of these drug prisoners were never
convicted of any violent felony.
"And someone's had to pay for this. Us."
"Two billion dollars for new prisons, $675 million a
year to feed, house and secure the drug inmates. Since 1982,
New York has opened 38 prisons, not counting annexes, all in rural,
mainly white areas, housing an increasingly black and Latino
population.
"Illegal drug use cuts across racial and ethnic lines. Yet
94 percent of those sent to prison under the Rockefeller laws
are black or Latino."

The Rockefeller laws have become more and more unpopular over
the years, but efforts to repeal them continue to run into stumbling
blocks. As the New York Times reported on May 9, 2002 (
"Pataki Proposes Changes To Rockefeller Drug
Laws"),
"As protesters in New York and Albany spoke out against the
state' harsh penalties for drug crimes today, Gov. George
E. Pataki put forward yet another proposal for breaking a
deadlock with Assembly Democrats over reducing sentences for
drug offenders. It is the governor's third attempt in the
last year and a half to reach an agreement with the Assembly on
the issue. The penalties for drug crimes, enacted in the
1970's, rankle many black and Latino voters, groups the
governor has been trying to please as part of his re-election
campaign. Nine of 10 people serving time for drug offenses are
black or Hispanic."

Unfortunately, as Ms. McCarthy wrote in her Newsday piece,
"The drug-law reform that Pataki has on the table is lousy.
It gives judges the power to reduce a small portion of the longest
sentences. But it actually increases the penalties for
marijuana-related crimes and provides not a single dollar for
drug treatment. A proposal before the Assembly would give judges
sentencing discretion in more cases and includes a treatment piece.
But, frankly, none of the proposals is that great. Real drug-law
reform would require making the sale and use of marijuana legal,
thereby eliminating the arrests of hundreds of people every day
and giving them criminal records. It would, quite frankly,
legalize and regulate the sale of all narcotics. It would provide
drug treatment for anybody who wanted it, without making it
mandatory for non-violent addict who don't want it."

Indeed, even the New York Times noted in its piece that
"But the Assembly Democrats say there is less than meets
the eye to Mr. Pataki's proposal. For starters, only people
with one prior felony conviction or no criminal record at all
would be able to appeal to a judge for the chance to receive
treatment, and most addicted felons have more than one conviction.
In 2000, about 1,600 people imprisoned on drug convictions were
first-time offenders who could have been treated under the
governor's proposal, but 1,752 others would not have
qualified." The Times continues:
"Supporters of the Assembly bill said the governor's
proposal still did not go far enough in giving judges the ability
to tailor penalties to individuals. 'You have to untie the
hands of the judges,' said Assemblyman Keith L. Wright of
Harlem, one of the sponsors of the Assembly bill.
"Some Democrats also object to the rules Mr. Pataki has
proposed for people who do receive treatment. Addicts who miss
an appointment or relapse to drug use during treatment could be
tried on the underlying charge immediately under the governor's
plan, and most do have a relapse at least once during treatment,
experts say.
"The governor's aides released details of his plan on the
29th anniversary of the signing of the Rockefeller laws. In
Albany, Christian, Jewish and Muslim clerics marked the day with
calls for softening the penalties. In Manhattan, the Rev. Al
Sharpton led about 100 protesters in calling for the repeal of the
laws in front of the governor's offices on Third Avenue.
"The latest proposal drew mixed reviews from advocates
for changing the laws. 'When you look at the details,
his proposals fall short,' said Robert Gangi of the
Correctional Association of New York.
"But Paul N. Samuels, the president of Legal Action Center,
said it was the first sign the impasse might be broken this
year."

Prior to Wednesday's demonstration, victims of the Rockefeller
Laws appeared on the
Pacifica radio networks's
Democracy Now. The
segment also included a look at the racist travesty of justice
perpetrated against the people of Tulia, TX (for more
info on the Tulia situation
click here). A streaming audio feed of the broadcast
as well as a brief summary and guest list is available
by clicking here.

A study by a nonprofit found that reform of New York's
draconian Rockefeller drug laws would result in saving millions
of dollars a year. According to the Schenectady Daily Gazette on
May 1, 2002 (
"Changes In Drug Laws Tied To Savings"),
"The state could save more than $91 million by sending
people convicted of second, nonviolent felony offenses to drug
treatment instead of prison, according to the Legal Action Center.
'What we found, I believe, are really dramatic savings for
the state,' said Anita Marton, senior attorney with the
Legal Action Center, a nonprofit organization that focuses on
criminal justice, addiction and AIDS."

The Daily Gazette reported that
"The Legal Action Center said its study showed the state
could save $30,666 to $74,243 for every second felony
offender diverted from prison to a treatment program. If 3,000
second felony offenders were diverted, the state would save anywhere
from $91.9 million to $222.7 million. The Legal Action
Center estimates more than 3,000 New York prisoners who are
incarcerated for second, nonviolent felony offenses could be sent
to treatment if the drug laws were changed. The center's
figures include the savings from reduced health care and welfare
costs as well as increased tax contributions from rehabilitated
offenders, Marton said."

The Daily Gazette article continues:
The savings also take into account the
cost of treatment. Treatment centers have some extra capacity
now, but there would be a one-time, upfront cost to provide
additional space in residential treatment centers, Marton said.
That cost would depend on how many people were diverted, she said.
The New York Association of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse
Providers joined with the Legal Action Center in calling for
changes to the drug laws. Veronica Uss, who received treatment
for alcoholism and is now director of a treatment program in the
Catskills, said she doesn't understand why changes to the
laws have stalled. 'I'm baffled because we have had,
for years, the statistics. We know that treatment works. We
know that it saves money,' she said. 'But somehow
there is a disconnect between reality - facts and statistics and
savings - and public policy.' Marton said that given the
state's budget gap, she hopes officials will look at the
potential savings from drug law reform. Pataki said Monday the
state has a $1.1 billion to $1.3 billion revenue
shortfall, based on 2001 taxes due April 16."

Rap stars Redman, Method Man, and others are featured on
a CD put together by hiphop artist Sista Asia. As reported by
NYU's Washington Square News on April 2, 2002 (
"Rappers Lend Help To 'Drop The Rock'"),
"For the past 12 months, Sista Asia has worked hard
to bring 'Drop the Rock' to life. The compilation
CD, named after an organization intent on having the
Rockefeller Drug Laws repealed--laws which some say
disproportionately affect communities of color--features
artists such as Redman, Method Man, the Cocoa Brovaz, and Rah
Digga, and includes production by Bucktown Productions and
Klansmen. Working under Seven Figures Entertainment, Sista
Asia's goal in putting together this CD has been to relay
political awareness through music."

Money raised by the CD will go to help the families
of prisoners locked away because of New York's harsh
Rockefeller laws. As the News reported,
"The goal of the project is to use the money generated
by the album to fund visitation trips for the children of
those imprisoned as a result of the Rockefeller Drug Laws.
'People get locked up for 15 to 20 for first time
offenses and children get lost in the shuffle,' she
said. 'My project [will] buy buses for the
children for visitations.' Fast becoming one of
the nation's biggest industries, prisons spend over
three billion dollars on inmate housing alone. With thousands
of people sent upstate, transportation for the families of
the imprisoned has proven to be a problem. 'God willing
there will be a volume II, III, IV,' she says.
'As long as we can keep it going we can create an
organization just for the children and buses.'"

The Times story notes that the Democratic Assembly's bill is
substantially different from a proposal introduced by
Republican George Pataki (see below), and the
"main sticking point will probably be over the scope of
judicial discretion" in sentencing of some drug offenders.
The story also reports that the Assembly bill "would
set aside savings from the state's declining prison rolls
to create 2,000 new treatment beds. Roughly 9,300 such
resident treatment beds exist now, but they are not all for
drug offenders. The governor's bill does not specifically
set aside money for treatment; his aides have said
such financing would come later."

Meanwhile, the
Rochester
(NY) Democrat and Chronicle reports (
"Senate GOP Would Boos Rehab For Drug Convicts")
that
"While acknowledging the state needs to rewrite its
drug-sentencing laws, Senate Republicans unveiled a
$20 million plan yesterday to expand drug-treatment
programs for convicts. The program would help up to
800 convicts a year enroll in drug-treatment programs rather
than go to prison. But a judge and a prosecutor would have to
agree. And it would be limited to people convicted of
nonviolent crimes."

Former advocates of the Rockefeller laws are now some of the
most vocal opponents.
New York Newsday reports
that former state Senator Douglas Barclay and
"a handful of his fellow Republican sponsors of the
controversial Rockefeller
drug laws -- including former Garden City Sen. John
Dunne and Warren Anderson, the Senate majority leader at the
time -- have taken the unusual step of denouncing their own
creation." Though many have worked in New York for these
reforms for some time, the paper credits the retired
lawmakers and former drug warriors "with helping to bring
the movement from the political fringes to the mainstream,
attracting groups such as the New York State Catholic Conference.
And their sustained efforts almost certainly encouraged
Gov. George Pataki to take the politically risky step of
proposing to soften these laws."
ReconsiDer, a nonprofit
drug policy group in New York state, held an
awards dinner in Albany to
honor former Senators Barclay and Dunne
for their efforts.

NY Governor George Pataki (R) has also released a
detailed bill to reduce prison sentences for some drug
crimes, while also adding new penalties for marijuana
convictions. The
New York Times reported
on March 10, 2001 that the governor's proposal
"would reduce penalties for the most serious
nonviolent drug offenders: those convicted of Class A
felonies, now punishable by a minimum sentence of 15 years
to life, for instance, would have their sentences
reduced to a minimum of 8-1/3 years to life."

Critics are skeptical of the Governor's proposal.
According to the Times, Robert Gangi, of the
Correctional Association
of New York, said of Pataki's bill:
"In fact, it may have very, very
little effect, or it may actually increase the number of
people being sent to state prison."

The
New York Times reported on Jan. 17, 2001 that
Governor George Pataki (R-NY) had proposed
easing the state's infamously harsh drug laws, many of them
dating from the Rockefeller administration
(
"Pataki Presents Plan to Ease Laws
on Drugs").
Though far from what critics of New York's current system are
calling for, the governor's proposal is hailed
in the Times as a good
starting point for negotiations. Governor Pataki's plan
would reduce prison sentences for some nonviolent drug offenders,
would replace treatment with mandatory sentences in some cases, and
would give judges some discretion in sentencing decisions.

The Times reports that
Governor Pataki's proposal would also make
about 500 inmates out of the approximately 600
in NY state prisons serving sentences of 15
years to life or more eligible for reduction of their sentences.
Violent offenders would not be eligible for sentence reduction.
Democrats in the NY state Assembly,
including Speaker Sheldon Silver, are pushing for much greater
changes.
(ReconsiDer
provides a great deal of
information on the New York laws on their
website.)

USA Today says that Governor Pataki is joining
a growing list of political leaders who are starting to realize
that the drug war is a waste, and that drug laws need to be
reformed.
("NY Joins Campaign To
Reform Drug Laws") The story, by Kevin Johnson,
quotes Acting ONDCP Director Edward Jurith on the inevitability
of some change:
"'The impetus for drug law reform in New York and
across the nation has never been stronger,' says
Edward Jurith, acting director of the White House
Office of National Drug Control Policy.
'We cannot simply arrest our way out of the problem of
drug abuse and drug-related crime.'" Critics note
that the former Drug Czar,
General Barry McCaffrey, also said the
same thing ("It is clear that we cannot arrest our
way out of the problem of chronic drug abuse and drug-driven
crime.",
speech by Gen. McCaffrey, June 29, 1999.